Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

So that particular

So we'd to call the meeting to order. This is the meeting of the architectural and historic border review for Wednesday, 02/25/2026. Roll call, we have all members present tonight. So we do have quorum. We'd to move on to public comment. This is when anybody may address the board regarding anything that is or is not on the agenda. We ask that you keep your comments to five minutes or less. Is there any public comment tonight?

My name is Kurt Van Blarcom. I live at 422 North Main Street, Hudson, Ohio, and been here a long time. In regards to the gazebo, I have read and have been part of the comments regarding the architecture and the importance of following the standards that we expect in the historic district for the structure itself. I'm gonna actually address, I'm watching the stink bug walk across here. I'm gonna address the site itself.

I've spent quite a bit of time looking at the site both as a city arborist as well as just a resident and enjoying all the concerts and the activities that take place there. One of the things that I've noticed in going to all the events there is the, especially in the peak of the heat of the sun, the lack of shade for a lot of the people that are sitting in the audience area. The Northeast corner is well embellished with oak trees. The West side has an understory of crab apples along the head wall. There's three and there's one shade tree on that West side that everyone seeks shelter from the sun.

And that's got the bench and it's typically the premium spot on that side of the gazebo to sit and be out of the sun. Believe it or not, the weather patterns and climate are changing, so the sun's gonna be more of a factor as we grow older. And I think that everywhere we go, in our own yards, our school campuses, our churches, we need to have more shade trees. So, I know there's been controversy about the amount of trees that are on the greens and certainly as the former city arborist, I see that. But I also see how trees can be very strategically assigned to a particular location to serve a particular function and not have high maintenance, not have any problems with longevity, they're structurally sound, they're there to provide a function and I think that some of the trees that are in the green aren't appropriate in that degree.

On that northeast corner, amongst those oak trees, we've got acorns, but we have a large sweet gum that drops these very spiky that are certainly not very comforting to sit on. So I think in terms of additional trees to be added and you could talk to the guy that runs the sound board there for the concerts and all the other people that go there on their lawn chairs and or blankets. Having trees strategically planted and this is where a certified arborist or landscape architect certainly could help the equation and making sure we're putting the right tree in the right spot. So I really wanted to hammer that point that we could embellish the existing trees that are there with another layer and I'm recommending that we actually would move in with a tree spade and I do this with the Hudson City Schools, I did it when I was a city arborist. There's an 80 inches, there's a 90 inches tree spade that very cost effectively moves in a wonderful Kentucky Coffee Tree, Cucumber Magnolia, or whatever I can help the city with in terms of a recommended species that would actually really provide a wonderful buffer from not only the traffic, but also for that big sun as it's setting its heat waves down on us.

Speaking of heat waves, I'm concerned about the size, the enlargement of what I would consider the impervious layer of the concrete plaza that we're I guess discussing. I think some of the architectural statements about the building itself have been addressed, but again, I think I've got concerns about the expansion of the pad, the concrete pad that surrounds the historic bandstand. In my

understanding of historic structures like that bandstand,

no matter where you go in the East Coast and any historic district that might have a bandstand, it's typically surrounded by greenery. It isn't surrounded by a plaza. When we take a bandstand, we surround it with concrete, we create a grandstand. I don't think we're talking a grandstand here, I think we're actually talking about keeping something very simple and very pure and elegant in terms of how it looks and how it functions, but I really would encourage that we don't expand that hardscape surface that surrounds the gazebo. Again, would encourage additional plantings, I think some of the plantings that are between the gazebo and the sidewalk aren't appropriate, I think we could do a better job there.

Certainly, the bandstand site itself needs some improvements. The concrete that surrounds the actual structure, the sidewalk itself, it needs to go. I think if you were to consider a stamped concrete, I don't think it should be glossy like it is at the cemetery. If you walk across the veterans section of the cemetery, that flagstone that used to be there was pulled out, replaced with a glossy, very slippery stamped concrete. I think that there's probably more of a flagstone or barnstone look and surface that would have some traction if it's a wet situation.

As far as addressing drainage, I'm on the board at Case Barlow Farm.

You're in about six minutes, I'll give you a few more seconds, but we do have to keep the meeting moving.

I think the drainage itself could easily be mitigated. I think there's all kinds of different drainage problems in Hudson with most yards, so there's a simple fix there that I could talk about, but I'm not gonna take that time. But again, keep the gazebo nice and simple. Don't add a lot of hardscape to it and then think about shade trees again, cost effectively moving in from some very strategic shade trees to comfort the people that come to the gazebo. Thank you.

Is there any other public comment? Seeing none, we'll close public comment and move on to consent applications. Tonight we have one, it is 20 Five-fifteen 1050 West Streetsboro Street and it's a sign.

Make a motion to approve as submitted.

All in favor?

Aye.

Anybody opposed? Opening old business, first is 2025 Dash 147888 North Main Street. This is alterations in the historic district.

Yes. Staff can give an update on this. I note that this application was continued from the February 11 meeting. Before you, you have a request from the applicant, a formal request to continue to the next meeting. They just needed a little bit more time to get their drawings together and their ideas for the door that the door that the board requested be looked at a little bit longer. So their request is to be moved to the March 11 meeting.

Yep. Motion to table to the March 11 meeting.

I move to table. Second.

All in favor?

Aye. That

is all for old business. Opening new business, first is 26 Dash 98201 North Main Street, and this is a demolition alteration and rebuild in the historic district.

Yes. Staff notes that this project did receive board approval at the 10/25/2023 meeting. The board approved the project with the following conditions. The recommendations two through six of the historical consultants report which is attached for the board's review to the agenda and that the proposed shutters be changed to wood as well as pellet traditional reserve series windows with simulated divided light be used. Staff notes the previous approval has expired and the applicant is here this evening seeking re approval for the proposed project. The applicant can run through the project overview with you this evening and answer any additional questions that the board may have.

Can you state your name and relationship to the application?

Yes, I'm Joseph Matava from Peninsula Architects.

I'm Elizabeth Swearingen, I'm also with Peninsula Architects.

So you guys have not changed anything since the previous approval?

So, we did take the comments from the previous approval and implemented them into this. So, there will be sandstone veneer that will be added to the exposed foundations. There would also be the Pella Reserve six over six double hung windows in the original locations that were found during the historic analysis and also exploration. We also looked at, sorry, the shutters. So the shutters are will also be the same proportion as operable shutters would be.

These would be wood. If the board is open to it, we would like to propose a very convincing composite material that has been accepted in other historic projects in the area. Yeah, let's see.

What is the composite material?

If the board can think back a little bit, we did that project over on Baldwin Street. And we brought you a high density composite painted actual shutter. And I think we would like to leave it open to see if we can bring you a sample of that shutter which we did give to the city that we didn't get back. So it was a while ago.

Couple years ago?

Yeah. No, no, that was when we did Baldwin Street.

Baldwin? Yeah. When we had the site visit?

Yeah, we had the site visit and if you look at the shutters over on Baldwin Street, they're amazing and they're more expensive than a wood shutter. They're instant threeeight, they've got the authentic hardware and what's nice about those is that you can have the actual louvers and they operate, but they're never gonna rot. And so it gives you like the real authentic shutter in its profile and its dimension and it's even probably a little heavier than a wood shutter, but you don't have to deal with the paint. So we would ask the Board to let us bring that as an option maybe as we get on in our process of construction, we can bring you a sample of a wood one, we can bring you a sample of the composite one, we can bring you pictures of the ones over on Baldwin Street with the exposed hinges and the steel holdbacks that are awesome. And so that's a great solution we think in the Historic District to get something that's gonna look good for a long time and the only way you're gonna know that it's not wood is if you were to go and gouge it with a knife.

If you'd be willing to have us come back and bring those, I'd like to bring them to you because I think it's a product that could be used widespread in this district and really be an improvement in terms of maintenance and aesthetics.

Is it the Endurian shutter? I was just pulling up. It one on the corner Of Baldwin? In May, yeah.

Okay. Yep. And we brought a small sample of a wood version of that and a composite version and we gave it to whoever was here before, Ms. Kaufman. And I thought we got it back but we tore our place apart and we didn't. So We're just gonna get another set of samples, Nick, if you guys can't find it. Or maybe you did give it to us and it got dumped, I don't know. But we did not have those samples when we were approved on the problem, but you approved it. But when we got them, we brought them back at another meeting. We because we I really was like, you guys gotta see this. And and then the cities wanted to keep them for a while.

I do. Yeah. I do remember it. Synthetic shutters that resemble real wood shutters. I remember I remember holding it. Remember If the

the board says wood is wood, then we're gonna do that. We're not gonna push on it, but we feel like it's a great alternative and if you'd be open to seeing them next to each other at a future meeting, can we get approval contingent upon like we're gonna be approved for wood, but can we come back later and say hey, look at this. Is that possible?

I don't see why we wouldn't be able to, but we'll see what the rest of the board thinks. Mr. Brown, do have any questions or comments?

Yeah, I wasn't on the board when this came, so my only question is I don't, are they a replacement for existing wood shutters or are there other shutters? I don't fully understand the scope of the project, I guess since I wasn't here for the first review.

Yes, they would be a replacement for the existing.

The existing wood shutters? Yes. And the existing wood shutters are not repairable. I guess my question is if the existing wood so the existing wood shutters can't be salvaged or think is

that most of them are starting to fall apart and so I think it probably replacing all of them would probably be the best idea.

I mean, guess my opinion would be, I mean, don't have, I wouldn't, it doesn't sound like I would object to the material use in the historic district per se, but I mean, I would just say that if, I mean, the Secretary of Interior's guidelines prefer care of what's existing if possible. So, I mean, it's always like a case by case if it's possible. So, I defer to the rest of the board because when you've seen this building in the last That's my only question.

Would you mind giving like a two minute overview for the new members, Just So the

the historic building on-site was originally built in 1840 and served as many functions over the years. Right now the building is sitting uninhabited and it's kind of falling into disrepair. During the our initial site visits, we found a lot of termite damage and as the building has been sitting, it's been experiencing some more problems, especially a lot of water infiltration into the basement. So the owner wants to basically save it from collapsing right now. So we're proposing to renovate and restore the building to its original historic footprint.

To do so, we're gonna be removing the addition that was put on the backside of the structure and then also removing the L single story portion that's on the north side of the building. During a historical analysis of the structure with doctor Robeson, it was determined that this l portion of the building was 50 younger than the existing horse, historical building. After consulting dingy movers, they had also determined that it would be impossible to move this l portion, with the historic part of the building due to its current framing condition and the original construction method. They would however be able to pick up the existing two story portion of the building, move it to the back half of the site so that the new foundations could be installed. Due to the very close proximity of the northern wall of the foundation of the L, it would be necessary to demolish this, anyways because we have to install a lot of, helical piles and new poured concrete walls so that we don't disturb the adjacent properties foundation.

Once the building is safely moved back into place and the l portion is reconstructed, the building will receive new materials to match the original house. This will include new wood siding that will match existing in original exposure, new Pella Reserve six over six double hung windows that will be installed in the original locations. These shutters, we already kind of talked about this, would have the either the new wood shutters or the composite. The new foundation walls that are exposed will receive limestone veneer which is more historically accurate for the area and probably this building. And then, the existing half round copper gutters and downspoots are to be salvaged and reused.

The existing roof shall remain on the two story portion of the building with minimal intervention at the chimney location. The existing chimney is to be removed and replaced with a thin brick veneered chimney that's to match the existing in location and also in dimensions. The single portion of the building is to receive a new standing seam metal roof that's also supposed to match the existing proportions.

So based on that, it sounds like now I feel like the original wood shutters would be going back on to a structure that is surrounded by other new finishes, Meaning these shutters would be going back where there's new siding, new windows, Pella reserves and it's not I kind of yeah.

Just a little bit of context.

That's where

we stand a little better now and I don't have that.

So yeah, the folks that weren't on the border or weren't at the site visit, so we had at least one site visit, we did bring in the consultant to assist us with this, it's a really difficult site, the north wall is eight inches from the neighbor.

That's very close.

You literally cannot get back there, so moving the whole thing and it's in pretty

rough shape.

But it sounds like my question kind of lacked the context of the other work that was happening around the shutter, so I understand and provided we see the material.

They're gonna do extensive work to the entire structure.

I have no further comments or questions.

The plan was still to lift up the building get Stick it in the back yard. The whole foundation is shot. Move it to the back

and then we're replacing the floor structure. So we're pretty much zipping all the studs off at the floor deck because the floor is you can't repair it. So it's a brand new floor structure with the existing frame parking right on top of it. It's kind of cool.

Is there any more like damage in the past couple of years since we talked that we should

I know

Or it doesn't really matter The contractor on the scope of work here.

Pumping a lot of water. I have not been on-site to review the newer damage, but it sounds like it's not doing well.

Ms. Zavinsky?

I would say on the shutters, I like to review the options. I'm not set one way or the other until we kind of review that and kind of hear what the rest of the board says.

Senko? No further questions.

From the site visit and I think shortly after you hadn't found anybody that was willing to do this construction at that, you know, manage it at the time I think because of the North Wall and you did talk about moving that section back of the upright. I'm not sure I remember about totally rebuilding.

Yeah, so if you remember what happened was the history, two sided history. First, we had the house moving up and understanding that we needed to pick this up and repair the foundation in very close proximity to the existing building to the north. One, he said it's not feasible to pick up the whole structure and move it. Can story, two story part, but the way that it's framed it would be impossible to pick the whole thing up and move it. And the other part is like it'd be impossible to do a new foundation underneath that wing with it in place.

And so those two things right there together make it really impossible to retain that northern piece the same time as you're trying to save his two story piece. And then on top of that was what Liz referred to as where Professor Robison came out at that meeting and he said, yeah, this piece to the north is not part of the original construction. He saw those as two different periods with the way the lumber was saw. So that kind of, in a way, to the Board at that time, was a pathway to say, yeah, it's not part of the original two story form, one. And two, it's gonna impede the entire project to try to keep it in place.

So it's worth it to take it down, rebuild it in the exact same form, and be able to move the main block and be able to underneath that north side. So that sound about like the whole story?

Yes. So once you do the new foundation on the two story after moving it back and then moving it in, what else are you gonna do to the siding and the other forms? What's gonna be left besides of the original? I

believe that we're there's a lot of pieces and parts on this building that are falling apart and so there are parts that have to be replaced, but I think that the main goal is to keep as much as the historic fabric intact.

Which would be the frame?

Yes, which would be Yeah, the frame the

so the floor is termite destroyed. There's no way to kind of reinforce those members and leave them in place because they're essentially powder. So we're gonna snip off all the frames right at the floor deck. We're gonna put in a new floor and then we're gonna put that frame with all the openings and the door openings and the roof and everything right back on this new floor deck.

Because the roof is slate, right?

Yeah, and the roof structure, I mean the roof structure was gonna need to be reinforced. We're not going to be removing those rafters, we're gonna be reinforcing. We're not gonna be removing the studs, we're gonna be reinforcing. So essentially if you take that building as it is right now, take the floor out and set that building right on a new floor, the main two story part of that building right on a new floor and then new windows, new siding, new doors.

And the roof, I'm thinking about one of the like the barn and the with the slate roof on Streetsboro. Mhmm. Streetsboro. Once you shift it and move it, it's pretty most possible that the tiles themselves are going to move and you're going to have some issues with that. Are you considering taking the tiles down or how are you going to protect them when they move?

If you take them down, they're going to fall apart. They're brittle.

If you move it,

you risk breaking them for sure. Then it comes down to a slate person that's gonna come out there and try to repair and slate risk. They're going out there, sticking a piece of slate in here, sticking a piece of slate in there and pieces break.

So the two story structure, the siding would be, I'm trying to figure out what's gonna be left of this historic structure because it sounds like it reminds me of the Baldwin bus house that ended up being basically totally rebuilt except for the front. And the frame.

But all that frame is existing.

Yeah. Nobody Nobody sees it, right? I was hoping that it would have left some in the wing exposed in that raised ceiling but that didn't happen. Anyway, yeah, that's my concern. And with the shutters, it's right on I mean, you can touch the porch when you're walking by.

It's so close to the street that it can be seen, you know, it's gonna, I need to see the samples as well side by side. It's just, I mean, the Baldwin Street one that sits up high, it's on the north side, it's not, nobody really walks through that. This is in town, right on the street, so it's important. And I'm just concerned, it's just gonna look like a new structure. And I was hoping that something would be.

And even still, if you're rebuilding that wing, how are you gonna do that with being so close to that within eight inches to the structure next to it, north of it?

So we would probably when it's this wall that's so close, you would have to build that flat and then raise it up with so that side, because it is so close to the neighboring building, it has a lot of more restrictions because it needs to be fire rated because it's so close. So that particular facade does have cement just for that fire rating, but you won't be able see it because it's so close.

That is kind of unusual to frame a wall with the exterior siding on it and then stand it up. But that's the only way you're gonna get it.

I just wanted to say that some of this as far as the building and the plan of construction, we talked about taking back portion off and you are going to do a patio and so forth, but I do think we had at that time on how the wing was gonna be done. And fifty years when it's what, 1840 and so 1890, it doesn't make a big difference. It's still, Yeah, you

it's almost like the sacrificial piece that makes the whole thing work in terms of creating a new foundation. And I guess the only kind of we can. And it's a lot because it's gonna make the structure sit there in its original form for Just

going look new, it's not going to look like that.

Chris Werkley. Yeah, I'm going with

the sandstone facing the pellet traditional reserve six over six and I'm fine with either the wood or the shutters versus having the PVC.

So, I have in front of me the preservation briefs number nine and it's very clear regarding so there's a call for respecting the significance of original materials and features, repairing and retaining them whenever possible, and it is not, and when necessary, replacing them in kind. In kind would be wood And so, especially to address the concerns of my colleagues where you have the frame, but everything else is new, so I think the least that could be done would be to replace it in kind. So, that would be my position.

It is wood siding, correct?

Other than

the one wall that needs to be fire rated.

Yeah, no, I know the siding I'm is speaking about the shutters, not using composite material.

Well, yeah, I have to see the shutters to even to even consider anyway.

Yeah. Yeah. But even then, all I'm saying is that we have very specific preservation briefs. Mean they address this very, very clearly. In kind. So, I would go for in kind.

So I guess we'll revisit the shutters. Will approve them as We'll consider them as wood for right now and then we can revisit that at later date when we have samples that we can see, touch, feel. Anybody have anything else?

I do just wanna add really quick. I do believe staph, we do have those. My predecessor gave me a box of things. I didn't know who they belonged to but I wasn't going to get rid of them. So I will I think I have what you're talking about. I can send a photo in an email and you guys can confirm if that's it and then

And then we'll come up and grab them.

Yes. That's fine.

No. It's ours now. So

I just I did just wanna know. Before you buy new ones, I just wanna confirm. I think we have shutters. I I believe those would be them.

They're they're like small squares.

Yes. Yeah. They're like this big

We're gonna put them on our window. I

thought I was crazy. I'm tearing up my office.

I'll make a motion to approve with the proposed sandstone, the appellate traditional reserve windows and the wood shutters being proposed at this

point. Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Anybody opposed? Alright. Thank you. Thank you guys for your

Next

is 25Dash1022.

Oh, do you wanna just stay and give a brief?

41 East Main Street and this is a commercial addition?

Yes. This is a commercial addition for an office and storage space for 41 East Main Street. This proposal did receive informal comments at the 04/09/2025 meeting and planning commission approval at the 01/12/2026 meeting. Before the board, you do have a request to table this motion to the to either I actually would like to look to you if you know have a date in mind, like the next meeting where we can table it to the continuous one.

I'm not

sure which one would work better. Yes. March 11 and then April 8.

Okay. But that that won't be the date that that's the date of the

meeting. Right.

That's the date

of the month.

The date that the So it'd be the fourth would be the Right?

Yeah. Those were the meeting dates. Yeah. The deadline would be the March 2 for that meeting.

Tuesday? Yeah.

That's less than a week. The

other one's the sixteenth deadline of the sixteenth for the twenty fifth.

Sorry.

That sounds right.

There's only one meeting in in in March.

Oh, I'm sorry.

So the next the next meeting would be April 8 with a deadline of March 30. The board doesn't meet for spring break.

We can continue to the next meeting and then play it Okay, by

so we get a motion to table it.

Make a motion to table this until the next meeting.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

All right, thank you.

That

is all for new business. Under other business, we do have an informal. It is 8424, which is 1957 Norton Road, and it's a new home.

Yes, the board did see this as an informal review at the 01/28/2026 meeting. At that meeting, the board noted concerns with the overall design compatibility and orientation of the home. You have the additional staff comments that were in front of you. The applicant is here this evening to answer any additional questions that the board may have about the design.

If you'd state your name and just relationship to the

Miamo Al Baloma, architect.

I own the lot.

Okay. How about you walk us through this and

When we initially met at the site, we were kind of, I was kind of given a program where we wanted a contemporary build.

Could you just pull that microphone closer to you or you can even.

Okay. Is that better?

Yep. Okay. It gets recorded in ninety minutes. Sorry. So,

that's what we proceeded to do. He he gave me an idea of what he wanted with with a picture that I kind of bought it and then he gave me parameters of what he wanted for the house and that's the approach. But when we went into the site, it was like dropping into a different area like into a forest. All you could see was woods and trees and stuff. You couldn't even see the locate.

You couldn't even see the roadway from where we were plotting. Plus, it's my understanding, I didn't know it at the time, but it was my understanding that we're actually in a very heavily wetlands type of area and when we did meet, it was noted that we had to worry about water. So that's why we addressed I addressed having everything but the garage area up 14 inches from the finished grade. That was the basic concept for doing the drawings. So that that's the direction we want.

Plus, view, like I said, we couldn't see anything around us. I didn't even know there was any houses near to us until I went on Google Earth and saw an aerial site. That's basically what our approach was to do this. It was a contemporary building and we were just fitting it into a site that was basically landlocked. Am I correct? Surrounded, we were surrounded by no wet plants. There's not much space to do much more than what we show. Do you have the site plan that the

This should be a more up to date one. I know we talked about rotating it.

Did you ever email that to us?

From Matt. He should have sent it over.

Sent it over, yeah. We turned it so it's not.

Sent it to me?

So it was either to you or to Lauren?

I did not receive any updates from Matt.

Did you receive the whole set of architectural and engineering?

No, I did not. I didn't receive anything following our meeting where we went over the board comments.

We apologize for that. We thought he sent it over to you. I double checked with him to see if you guys got him.

Said you did.

You told me you did.

About what date that was with us? Was that this week? Was that last week?

It would have been the day after we met, so it would should have been I thought it was Friday.

Yeah. Friday.

No. I did not receive anything.

We actually that isn't straight on like that. It's actually twisted. You have it on your cell phone if you wanna

show it. I'd be able to send it over somehow or

If you can email it to me, but I I don't know.

It's kind of tough.

You're just talking about rotating it to the right. I think they can picture that.

Yeah, that's essentially all that it is.

So rotating it like 90 degrees or rotating it just angled? We

had it at a slight angle, maybe like 30 degrees roughly.

Does it eliminate the curve in

the driveway? Mean where the driveway curves to the right is the building kind of at that angle?

Talking about like doing something like this?

That? Yeah, just like

that. Okay.

Within the property.

Yeah, within.

Does that create an issue though with it being parallel to the street? Isn't that one of the

So they do not have to, if you're 130 feet back or more, don't have to hold So orientation you could rotate it. You could face the garage, the street, all of that is waived if you're over 130 feet back from

the right one. Making sure we weren't creating another problem.

Yeah, had a meeting with the applicant between the art board meeting and this meeting.

To the wetland is that?

They will need variances for wetland setback impact just to the wetland setback I believe. I think we were were

going to

have It's just one spot or something like that.

You may fill some but they would need variances for that and they've applied for that. So we're in the applicant is requesting overall design comments as it is going to border zoning appeals and that could affect the footprint of the building and variance requests.

Okay. So why don't we go through the elevations then because that's really what is going to matter at this point.

So we did share the comments, did you have a chance to watch the meeting?

Yes I did.

Okay, so they have heard your comments from the last meeting But is there anything you're seeking clarification on from the Board or you'd like to discuss in greater detail?

I wish you would have seen the section because if you looked at the sections, you could I wanted to comment you were concerned about areas in the core is a five foot corridor and it opens up into a great big open area that the stair goes up to. So, I didn't I personally didn't think that was such a huge issue. As for the bathroom, it might be a little bit high, but I don't think it, I think it gives it a very nice bathroom. I wish, if you don't mind, I can give you, I brought a copy of my drawings here. I can give you the section if you want to look at it and you can run it down.

And what did you want to bring up with that?

I don't think it's I think one of the comments was that they were concerned about the height.

Okay.

I don't think if you look closely at that section, it's not cut through the bathroom or anything, bathrooms, cut through bedrooms, both at that section, the upper level. I don't think it's that outrageous in my opinion, okay?

I think more of the board's concern about the design was is that it doesn't really fit with the neighborhood. It's a completely different design than anything else within that area and part of the land development code is that not that they're all supposed to be exactly the same, they can't look alike also, but it doesn't really fit with, call it your more Western Reserve Architecture, which this whole community is Western Reserve architecture and the land development code is written for Western Reserve architecture.

I was not aware of everything that had to be Western development and plus we've also looked around and there is some contemporary homes built in this area. It's not in a historical district either so plus you're never gonna see it to be honest about it. You're not gonna see it from the road because it's plopped into a heavily treed and stuff area, so. I think that

was more the board's concern than the actual interior height of the ceiling.

Okay, well I understand what you're saying, but yeah, I mean that wasn't the program, other medium type of construction to contemporary building. I think either me or my client here realize that you want to route to reserve. If we had to do Western Reserve, we'd have to start from scratch, so to speak.

I don't what we're saying.

So the land development code here is is how it's formulated is that pretty much is when you look at the types of structures, there's like five different ones I think it is, it's something like that, there actually are examples of them actually on the website, and it is all geared towards kind of Victorian, colonial, and yes there are some, I mean there was township for many years, so there were some that before that land development code that yes, they do exist, but even in this neighborhood though, there really aren't any contemporary homes in that general area.

Right, and it focuses on proportions and I beg to differ that you are gonna be able to see this, especially half of the year when the trees don't have foliage, and your neighbor who has a very, you know, Western Reserve looking house is looking right at this. You're on the edge where they don't have a whole lot of trees covering this building. So I don't agree with that this is not gonna be seen.

Yeah. That house sits pretty far back but it's very visible from the street.

That's right.

That one that's to the left.

Because their whole yard is clear. Either So gonna see that corner of the building, you just rotate it. So I would weigh heavily that you relook at the proportions of the building and the design to the complexity of the neighborhood Cause right now it looks, and I hate to say it, but looks like a pole barn on a farmland, which would be totally fine, but that's not where this neighborhood is.

Just to clarify, one of our other staff members did receive that site plan and I just passed it.

Okay.

Your update site plan.

Just don't seem to add up. That 20 foot high height that faces the street just doesn't feel like it has any character to the neighborhood. I understand why you did it as a barndominium, but it doesn't fit with the Western Reserve or the neighborhood at all.

Who's that?

Was this yours?

There's not a specific requirement for Western Reserve architecture but for compatibility of the area.

We could run through, I mean, that's two people out of seven. So Mr. Brown?

Yeah, no, I agree with what John said. I mean, think the staff laid out kind of the sections of the land development code that would apply that we would kind of be required to consider and unless there's, I mean, don't see, because it's a new site, it's blank, it's not like, you're not dealing with, apart from the wetland, the kind of zoning rules, there's no kind of existing restrictions that would lead you to have to do something completely different, so it's hard to see why it would, it's a lot of exceptions to the code that would have to be made. I know this is still informal. Yes. I don't really wanna go further than that because it's not, we're not here to adjudicate each other other except to say that if we were, we'd have to have kind of really sound reasons why each of these exceptions is granted and that turn in on board that usually doesn't happen.

All I would but I agree in general that it's the massing and the relationship to the buildings in the area is what we generally

Ms. Zurginski?

I think it is. I was looking for the note in here but I don't know that we've really discussed the fact that there's not really an obvious front entryway on this and that normally is a requirement, right, that it's like true. So that would be need to be what's seen from the road, correct? Is that how it's written in our code?

Since they're 130 feet back, they can cite the entryway on a different facade than facing the road but we did recommend that there was a central more prominent entryway.

Yeah.

There's a lot of doors, but it as I'm looking at the elevations, there's not an obvious one that's like, this is the front door of this home. And that's usually, you know, something we've talked about with a lot of other properties over time, making sure that that's specific. I mean, generally, just agreeing with everybody else, I don't think it fits that area. I think that I'm familiar with driving down and and the house that's to the left of it does sit way back, but you can still see it really well from the road. So I don't think that this one's gonna be overly hidden based on what it looked like on that site plan. Looks like it would just sit a little bit forward of that. So just in general agreement of what's been said already.

Zinkel? No

further comments

at this time.

Sargella?

One Yeah. 130 foot setback is great, but you don't really have, and it's wooded, but it's not really wooded where you're gonna be placing the, citing the house. I said, the

off its open spot in the whole site.

Yeah, it's because it's a difficult lot, that's why it hadn't been built on before because of the wetlands and so forth. So your only area really shoves you over to the West Side and that's losing all your protection of the the wood that you're, you know, claiming is hiding it in the wood. That's a concern as well and because it's exposed.

Ms. Kinney?

So, it's a question for staff. You were very specific about the issues. What if the applicant did what you suggest, like gable roofs, a more central front entryway and door trim and then fenestration, etcetera, etcetera. Would we consider that this is compatible with the neighborhood?

Yeah, those were maybe separate pieces that could help with the compatibility, but I think it's kind of like an overall it needs an overall change in architecture to be compatible. But those were ways that it

could it could be help you compatible, right.

Which would force a completely different design.

It's a little

more than just putting a gable roof on the top of this building. Yeah,

wouldn't work. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I understand. Do people understand when they buy land around here that is it specified that whatever they built has to be compatible with the other houses around them? I'm just curious.

When they buy land?

Yeah, when they buy land.

Like when

the realtor tells them that or depends on the realtor I'm who's

buying a wooded lot and I want a very modern house, right, and then I come here and I find out all I can have is Western Reserve architecture, so I'm just curious to know if people are informed about that.

It's typically if their builder or design team does a lot of work in Hudson or if they've talked to us prior to designing

The information is available.

The codes and everything are online so you

have to do your

due diligence if you're planning on going somewhere.

Responsibility is the

person purchasing something.

I can speak to building my own home with a builder that had never built in Hudson and they went and made a point to tell me that they read our forty, fifty page code before they went down So the design plan the information is available. So they went and found it.

Just to make sure we are fair, right?

Hold on, it's readily available.

Yes, okay.

So guess that's the feedback from the board.

Okay.

And is there a way we'd be able to be compatible if we did make those changes or?

Depends on how you put them together. It

would technically be a redesign, I understand.

Yeah, it's gonna be a considerable design change in my mind. I'm not an architect, but I think it would be a considerable design change.

It's a scrap.

Yeah, mean, don't see how I'm not saying it's a bad design, just doesn't fit.

So

you can continue having conversations with staff, they really do have a very good feel of how this board thinks about things, so they would be very helpful, but I don't see how we would move forward with the design as is.

I understand.

Maybe if you go down the

this

doesn't convey barn to me. It's a shed roof that doesn't feel like the barn, so if you pick up that aesthetic maybe that helps you with your proportions,

I don't know.

In my mind when I think barn to many I think a gambrel roof, I think

gable roof.

It's using the barndominium construction type.

That way you understand, right? Yes, okay, that I get. But yeah, from architectural style, I just I

don't contemporary, know

it's contemporary.

Yes, it's a little too contemporary for that neighborhood.

Would you be able to do like a barndominium style building and be in compliance if we followed, let's say that Western Reserve aesthetic, is that?

Isn't there one on Hudson Aurora that when you get down towards Tinker's Creek?

Actually, I saw that exactly. That

was a barn. That was

a renovated barn. Yeah.

It's a house isn't it?

You'd have to.

I'm old.

It's just a red blur to me but no you're good.

I'm hearing seems like you would be farther ahead to build something that looks like a barn.

I understand that.

Yeah it doesn't have the whole structure but

you're just

mainly talking about using vertical siding, using the proportions of a barn.

I saw this and it was

definitely a little more contemporary

than what you're

used to seeing in

a hotel. This one had metal siding, is that true? One we were looking at.

This one on Hudson Aurora?

No, the one you have.

Oh, this

one, yeah, as of now it is.

Yeah, there's just a lot of different ways that it was more contemporary.

I understand.

Metal roof. This is roof?

Question about the rotation too. I know it would be preferable if it was, let's say, 90 from where it is now. So it's like more front facing. But wouldn't we be more into the the setback if we did that? Because it's not that much room to work with. That's kind of why we went for

Yeah. I understand. Yeah. I guess the our comment was you maybe that's what you looked at. Can you rotate it to reduce the setback?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Or impacts to the setback, excuse me.

Is that something you'd be able to tell us if we did I'm not saying this one, but if we did redesign and we did have her front facing, would we be able to do something about that?

Do something about?

I'm sorry? The setback?

That would go through the Board of Zoning Appeals. Okay. So no matter what, any impacts to the setback, you would need to go to that board and our comment was just to try to reduce those as much as you can through your design.

Okay. It's just difficult.

Yeah. No, I understand. I understand that some impacts are probably going to be necessary for to build anything on this site, but it's just like we recommended not filling any wetlands because that's a big hurdle

with our But

we're happy to react to any if you want a revised site plan and a design to run by us. You can start with myself and Lauren. And then we can decide if it's something we could talk to the Chair and Vice Chair if it's something that another informal would be appropriate, we can work with you on that.

Well, you. I appreciate it. Thanks so much.

That's an informal. Okay. Yeah. Next

we have another informal, which is two six dash six nine eleven South Main Street, and this is the gazebo on the green.

Yes. Nobody will be at the table today. I can I can provide a couple updates? Just updates on the overall gazebo project. We have public comment out on our website, but that that closes on February 27, so in a couple days.

Last Tuesday, a few members of the Architecture Review Board joined us on-site across the street or not even across the street for a site visit to just kind of look at the overall structure. In your packet, we do have revised drawings, revised site plan here and a rendering that we have prepared, we took to counsel. The scope of work has changed based on the public comment and your comments as well. This is just the overhead view, but you can see the concrete pad layout adjusted a little bit. The original pad, the pad is that red line within that.

The green area outside of that is just repairing grass, so that's not part of the pad, just to clarify. The improvements to the actual structure now are limited to just repair and in kind material replacement. On our site visit, we saw some of those areas that are worse for wear, some rotted wood, some of the steps need repair, painted, things like that. So we've been performing that work as staff since this was constructed. So no other exterior changes to the actual structure.

Landscaping would be implemented as well as shown on here. It was revised a little bit in this new drawing. Stormwater improvements. And we would like to pursue the idea of an ADA compliant lift. I think that's been a desire of staff, counsel and a lot of the public comment that we received.

So City Council did request your feedback on the revisions. We'll be going back to counsel soon, and we can relay those comments to them. And so we prepared these drawings with our contractor, KGK, landscaping, and we have a couple lift examples for the ADA lift. One of them is a pretty interesting design where it would remain as stairs, and it would actually be converted to a lift. You'd see that in the packet, but that's one we're pretty interested in.

But we'd like to get your feedback on all that. So this would not be a vote or anything, And I'm we would anticipate coming back to the ArcBoard if we pursue the lift with elevations and more concrete design on that.

As far as the lift, think you and I had talked about this that I actually know somebody that has those stairs that lower down and then raise up. Is a nice looking they look like regular stairs until it drops down and then starts going up.

My understanding the treads and the rails are wood so we could paint those which is pretty The

whole thing

is not wood but the treads and the rails were

So I had a question about the lift. It would be accessible at all times because in order to be ADA compliant, it has to be accessible at all times, right? So how would this work? Somebody would come, press a button, and then the lift would go

We met with the supplier. That is an idea. There could be a button kiosk right next to this that operates it. And he said it does operate like a garage door. If there's something under it, are sensors. And it wouldn't

One question I had was safety. Kids play around. So what happens when you have kids around?

It's gonna go up and down and I guess we'll have to monitor that.

Okay. Another question I had, because I did a fair amount of reading about is, it was mentioned that a passive ramp is often a good solution, and a passive ramp means it's not temporary, right? And the way you could do it, you could do it not as a straight up ramp from the edge, but as a kind of a garden walk which would be curved so that it would give you much less of an incline and it would be accessible to handicapped people, older people, etcetera. There wouldn't be the issue of safety with the kids. It would probably be less costly although didn't

Is this something you would move?

No, it would be a passive ramp is something that is there forever, so to speak.

That was looked at because of the grade that it has to come down at, it would be an extremely long ramp.

Well, but if instead of the green is supposed to be the green, right? So on the other side of the, I can't remember which side it is, I guess it's west, you have different walks and you could do the same thing and curving it.

Then you're gonna create a, you're gonna, well, okay, I mean, I don't know. But

So rather than having something straight, you could start from the sidewalk and would actually, it would be much more appropriate in terms of style to the site.

So they'd regrade the whole site?

From the beginning of the ramp to the gazebo and one section of the railing would actually be a gate that could be open and closed.

How would you get across the ramp to go across the green? Because that ramp is gonna be like 60 feet long.

Well, the the ramp would be like a a walk a walkway.

The ramp and then sloping the grade

on either side

of it so

it's so

it's green.

Right, you regrade huge portion of the green. Well, you can make that comment to counsel.

Well,

didn't

bring the details about the distance, but it seems to me that

Certainly, Birmingham.

Yes.

Okay, yeah, I'm following now.

You see what I'm saying?

Yeah, I'm having trouble finding example, but I hear you.

And the advantage of this would be that there would be metal involved, no aluminum because the stairs for lift obviously are not gonna be, it's not gonna be wood, right, you'll have the mechanism, you're going to have to maintain it as it is, we have a hard time maintaining the gazebo, right? Some of the railings are in really bad shape, the paint is peeling, so if we can't see to a couple of railings, I can imagine what it would be with a lift. Just thinking maintenance.

So you're proposing berming and making the property go up so that there's no handrail or drop so grade to some extent and gradual. Yeah.

I've seen that in a lot of public gardens in Europe for instance. They would never put metal lift on historic or don't know, historic or traditional building let's say because there is obviously a disconnect in terms of weight loss. So it would be much more compatible.

I could see of

how to develop this south side of it from that standpoint. Coming that was trying to as a viable option in order to make.

So I'm missing something, what

I thought this

two fifty. Yeah.

We wanna do that this year, that's all the Oh. Yeah. Likely this spring is what we're trying to

And it's for the event?

The lift itself may come a bit later, but we want to definitely pursue the landscaping and surrounding improvements, the storm water improvements. Electric conduit.

There are a couple of different issues. One is the ADA compliance because you can't I mean if you're having a big public event this summer, it has to be ADA compliant.

All our we want all our events to be ADA compliant. Nothing is now obviously there is no lifter or ramp. Our goal is to make it ADA compliant in the future.

And how much would the lift cost?

We have those, I don't have those directly in front

of me. Not wholly expensive. Like the stairlifts, they're not wholly expensive.

Right, right, right. Because if it's not that expensive, could it be temporary, because it's not appropriate for the site. I mean this is a green, and the person who did the comments, we can't have an opinion on the amount of concrete, right? We can only have

We absolutely can.

We can? Oh!

So if you read, that's my opinion, if you read the Secretary of Interior Standards, there's an entire section on-site and if you read the nomination form, which I did for the historic district, the original nomination form that's on file with the Secretary of the Interior, the green itself is an object of preservation.

Okay.

So So kind of, I mean in fact, I would argue that the gazebo structure is a non contributing structure because it was built after the establishment of the district and the period of significance ends in 1963. Right. So it's a facsimile of an

earlier However,

I would argue it must be protected because of its relationship to the open space around it, to the trees, to the buildings, to the sight lines, I mean all of that I believe we're obligated

to consider because I was told, because I was a little, how should I say it, disappointed that they added concrete surface to the green, right? It's a green and it's, And we have the other plaza on the other side, right, so that's enough. And I was told none of your competence because it's not a building, so which is it?

My understanding is the board would not be approving the concrete work, just the modifications to the structure itself, which at this time include the potential lift.

I would argue that the law requires that we.

Okay.

I think it's clear.

You can review that further, but that was

That my understanding

coming into

would be very helpful.

Still can make a comment on

You can still comment on it, of course. We're not voting tonight.

Right, right, right, well as a comment, I would say that the green is not that big. Hudson has, in terms of the greenery, doesn't have that much and to add concrete to the green is probably not a good thing and if we could put more trees, that would provide shade, and it's true that even here in the summer, you're attending some of those concerts, a lot of those spots are very unpleasant, right? People sometimes come with umbrellas or certainly hats. So, if we want to make this green more accessible to everyone, having more trees would certainly be good. More concrete?

Absolutely not.

Yeah.

And that's why also the idea of a walk that would encourage people to walk in the green rather than see a bunch of concrete.

About the improvements proposed and for the lift, the elevator kind of tight and the stairs, I was just concerned about the question about the kids being there and access to that and was wondering since that stair one is a custom built, I'm not sure what the custom means, if custom means colorization or if you can it's customized per your need for the steps. I would just see if there's any way that they can have a riser as well versus it being open, whether that riser because of the need for collapsing or if it's something that's a solid that could fold in to the folding of that. That would be my concern.

You can ask the manufacturer that

falling or kicking because that's a requirement of AD. The stop for the foot. And then the sides, if that can be enclosed somehow where the kids could not crawl into that side area, that's fracture for both of them because once the elevator one goes up, you have the under compartment. Gate where at the entrance point that's there when it goes up, it would just be the sides. From my perspective on this layout, the the landscaping around the angled still feels off kilter to me from that

Just to buffer the the lift a bit. Okay. Lift.

Yeah. I would try to make that more proportional to everything. Since everything's so evenly proportioned, I would try to make

Mhmm. Suggest.

Yep. As a buffer, don't know that how much that actually need side. The other side maybe has more landscaping, which causes this is the side that feels mostly open, which is kind of why we're

One thing with the concrete, you see the south side, the red line where the current, there's only like three or four feet from there. We wanted to get at least six feet so you can get around the

structure especially agree totally with that.

Just them like that's kind of how that happened and then the concrete kind of

I'm actually fine with the concrete. You are increasing a huge amount. I like the additional benches that you can and that the concrete actually goes up to the light post so you can have that maintenance a little bit e like it's huge, but it's not really increasing it that much, especially when we're out there looking at it, didn't feel like it was gonna say.

It increases if you look at the surface by 50%.

Yeah I'm not sure. Actually we have that on We have that on

It's the

under 50. I don't know if that radius Those are my concerns of the stair riser one and then just the

Obviously you prefer the stair riser model?

I'm fine with either one.

Oh you're

fine with either one? Okay. But because the stair one looks like an element similar to what's there already, that one weighs a little bit heavier.

I like the sterilizer. I just wish that it could be customized to I don't care for the side railings. I I would like it to look more traditional, like a rod iron kind of thing. I don't know if that would be if there's requirements for the way that railings are, but I think if it could be designed to look more traditional to go with a gazebo, but I like the concept of it.

Svenko, did you have anything to add?

I don't like adding the lift to the historic structure. I understand ADA compliance, but.

Is it because of the design of the lift or?

No, because it takes out a section of the

Of the railing? Okay.

But at the top, couldn't the railing become a gate with exactly the same banisters as the other side? That was the idea for the

That would

be up to the design. Miss Zuginski, do you have anything?

I I mean, I kind of agree with that. It's a little bit tough. I mean, once we see some actual renderings of the lift, I think that might help a little bit of it along with the structure. Obviously, I agree with I think some of the prior the stairs, I think will integrate more into the overall structure better than what, the other one is. Concrete, I went in kind of agreeing with there's way too much concrete but when we actually walked it, it didn't feel quite as overwhelming as it might look on the visual there, particularly where it comes out in the front that feels like a lot more but there's that electrical that's there right now that I kind of think takes away from the green that's there to begin with, so turning that space into concrete to me didn't make a huge difference.

Also, I guess from a function perspective, if you are looking at ADA and having a little bit more space to move around as well as it's a I mean, this won't mess sometimes when you walk it depending on certain times of the year if we've gotten a lot of rain or right after winter, that probably makes it a little bit more functional than only having green there. So I have mixed feelings about it, but can understand where it might make it actually a little bit more user friendly.

So is that green at all for Farmers Market for the second half of the season?

There are no events in the winter. There are public events, no I live two blocks from there.

No I'm not worried about winter but I mean most of last spring was

Yeah just when it's wet and rainy

and Really a wet spring so Couldn't no one

use the Gazebo Green for the Hudson Farmers Market for the second half of the year. We were banished because of the water problems. The water sat for so long, there was no grass so we couldn't be on the grass so that we didn't damage the grass.

And also just The water's a problem. Yeah. To comment on the obviously there's a need for some repairs. I didn't quite realize just from driving by regularly I hadn't really been right in front of it in a while but yeah there's some definite it's definitely worn and it's definitely need of some definite repairs.

We did use it for the winter's market. We lined people up along the sidewalk, but we couldn't get all the way to the gazebo.

Next we have the findings of fact for case 20Five-three61. Anybody have any comments regarding the findings of fact?

What does it mean, what happens next?

That's code enforcement thing. That's the city and the homeowner. So we have a motion to adopt those findings.

I move to adopt

the findings. Second.

All in favor?

Aye. Okay.

We have the minutes from January 28. Were there any corrections or additions to the minutes? I didn't see any. So we have a motion to approve the minutes from January 28?

Approve Mr. Secretary.

That's your thing.

Did we have anything?

We need a motion.

Oh, was starting and

then you Go guys ahead.

I move to approve the minutes from January 28 meeting.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

And the Okay, minutes abstain from Miskimy. And the minutes from February 12.

Motion please. I'll move to approve the minutes from February 11.

Second.

All in favor? Aye.

Anything from staff?

No. I don't have anything prepared. We have no staff updates for you at this time.

Okay. So anybody else?

I did have a question The for new build on Oviatt, North Oviatt, kind of mid build check.

Yeah, that was on my list. I know they put the windows in recently.

I don't know what they are, just drove by.

Yeah, I

saw those

one up this week. Check that out.

We're ready for a motion to adjourn.

Okay, move to adjourn at 08:52 p. M.

Aye, we are adjourned.